A United States federal appeals court has ruled that a wide range of tariffs imposed by former President Donald Trump on global imports were illegal, striking a major blow to one of the cornerstones of his trade policy. However, the ruling allows the tariffs to remain in effect until mid-October, giving the Trump administration time to decide whether to escalate the case to the Supreme Court.
The decision centers on tariffs imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which Trump frequently invoked to justify sweeping duties on steel, aluminum, and other imported goods. While the former president argued that such measures were necessary to protect national security and American industries, critics accused his administration of abusing trade law for political and economic leverage, sparking tensions with key allies and trading partners.
In its judgment, the court concluded that many of the tariffs went beyond the legal authority granted under Section 232. Judges emphasized that while presidents have broad discretion on national security matters, they are not empowered to impose tariffs that exceed the scope of statutory intent or bypass established trade procedures. The ruling effectively invalidates significant portions of Trump’s global trade restrictions, though it temporarily preserves their enforcement to avoid disruption while appeals are considered.
Trade experts say the decision could have far-reaching implications for U.S. economic and diplomatic relations. Many of the tariffs had triggered retaliatory measures from the European Union, China, Canada, and other nations, escalating global trade tensions and costing U.S. exporters billions in lost market access. Economists argue that rolling back the tariffs could ease strained relations, reduce costs for American manufacturers, and lower consumer prices, though industries that benefited from tariff protection may face renewed foreign competition.
The Trump administration, which has maintained a hardline approach to trade, has not yet confirmed whether it will pursue a Supreme Court appeal. Legal analysts suggest that while the Court could choose to hear the case, it may be reluctant to expand presidential authority in trade matters beyond what Congress has explicitly outlined. Should the administration fail to appeal by mid-October, many of the contested tariffs could be lifted, reshaping the current trade landscape.
Meanwhile, business groups and labor unions are closely monitoring developments. Some industry leaders welcomed the court’s decision, saying it restores balance to U.S. trade law and limits executive overreach. Others, particularly in steel and aluminum sectors, warned that removing tariffs could lead to job losses and weaken domestic production capacity.
As the mid-October deadline approaches, the ruling sets the stage for a high-stakes legal and political battle that could redefine the boundaries of presidential power over trade and alter America’s economic strategy on the global stage.
